Fair Play for women have got the conversion therapy consultation extended

[Clymene]

This is amazing news

fairplayforwomen.com/government-forced-to-extend-public-consultation-on-conversion-therapy-after-fair-play-for-women-threatens-legal-action/?fbclid=IwAR1G5wZH42TzmnfcN1dH0-kNf-DGCgQDEiyX2a2u4HhtJ015E17Ypfr5KZ4

Let's hope for the long grass then!! The whole basis of this consultation is so flawed - in order to get our comments read, we are having to tick the 'slightly agree' box, regarding the entire bill.

Whereas what we would like to say, is 'no' to the entire bill. Because the devil will be in the detail - even if a vanilla 'gay conversion' bill were to be passed by gvmt, in drafting, 'gender' might get slipped in.

But well done to Fair Play For Women, of course.

Great work dr nic

I am in awe of dr nic. She takes competence and strategic thinking to a new level without any fuss or grandstanding.

Thank you Clymene and Hadrosaurus had not seen that background on the Easy Read version of the consultation. Right so they fucked it up once and then they just sort of left it…. ?!
WTF…?

Maybe (as Times comment poster also suggested) because they’re finding it’s completely impossible in non- hand wavey non-complicating non- obscuring facts language to actually explain these issues in a way that doesn’t use sleight of hand on normal everyday language use? Which clear explanations would rely on..

How do you even explain “gender identity” in plain English? Ask 5 TRAs what it is and you’ll get twelve answers.

And all of them will be handwavey bollocks.

I don't think this has been posted anywhere

www.conservativehome.com/platform/2021/12/alicia-kearns-lets-interrogate-the-attacks-on-the-conversion-therapy-ban.html

(Hat tip to DH who is a real politics geek and reads all sorts of stuff. I have noticed that it takes a debate to turn up in his Twitter feed for him to take notice of my ranting. It can't be an issue if it is just on MN or in the DM.)

The comments are a good mix. I don't agree with the author (obviously) but glad to see open debate.

Also interesting, though off topic, is the generational thing. Kearns (34) authored another article with Nicola Richards MP (26) in August calling for the reform of the GRA. Both apparently are strong supporters of Transgender Rights. I suspect that this split within the Tories is typical, as it is elsewhere. Conservative voters tend to be older, so less incentive for senior politicians to kowtow to the young.

In the comments to Kearns article:

Trans people commit suicide at a rate of around 70%.

It's been updated on the consultation page - 4th feb.

www.gov.uk/government/consultations/banning-conversion-therapy

Update includes a link to the new easy-read version.

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1039597/Banning_Conversion_Therapy_Consultation_-_Easy_Read.pdf

Has the old one been archived? I couldn't find it. It would be interesting to see what they've changed.

Thank goodness for Dr Nic, I cannot imagine what the current landscape would look like without her calm, professional competence and willing to work hard behind the scenes.

I think there should be a statue of her

@OldCrone

Update includes a link to the new easy-read version.

assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/1039597/Banning_Conversion_Therapy_Consultation_-_Easy_Read.pdf

Has the old one been archived? I couldn't find it. It would be interesting to see what they've changed.

I think Sex Matters saved a copy, I'm sure they will be going through to track the changes.

I am so grateful that we have women like Dr Nic and Maya who are working on this stuff full time.

@Helleofabore

My only complaint about the Times article is that they have used the label ‘gender critical’ in reference to FPFW and other women’s groups.

They should stop this. It is confusing to those who don’t know what it means. Plus, it is Women’s groups!!! It is women campaigning for their rights and the rights of children.

I agree with you. It's an obscure and unfortunate term - how did it ever come to be adopted by women? It is sufficient for the media to refer to women.

I see in the easyread version they have avoided explaining what "gender" is so the can of worms is safely unopened. They've just said Transgender is when your gender is different from your birth sex.

I like the document, when they cut out all the waffle it's so stark.

Genuine talking therapy is used a lot by: counsellors (and) mental health professionals. It is a good way to help people with problems with feelings and their mental health. But talking conversion therapy is different because it tries to change your sexual orientation or change you from or to being transgender. We want the law to say that you have to be over 18 to give permission to have talking conversion therapy.

So I have a question. If Pips Bunce can change "genders" three times a week why is changing "gender" an illegitimate goal for counselling and therapy?

@Needmoresleep

I don't think this has been posted anywhere

www.conservativehome.com/platform/2021/12/alicia-kearns-lets-interrogate-the-attacks-on-the-conversion-therapy-ban.html

(Hat tip to DH who is a real politics geek and reads all sorts of stuff. I have noticed that it takes a debate to turn up in his Twitter feed for him to take notice of my ranting. It can't be an issue if it is just on MN or in the DM.)

The comments are a good mix. I don't agree with the author (obviously) but glad to see open debate.

Also interesting, though off topic, is the generational thing. Kearns (34) authored another article with Nicola Richards MP (26) in August calling for the reform of the GRA. Both apparently are strong supporters of Transgender Rights. I suspect that this split within the Tories is typical, as it is elsewhere. Conservative voters tend to be older, so less incentive for senior politicians to kowtow to the young.

Thanks for the link. I thought the photo of Kearns was of a woman I remembered seeing on the Women's and Equalities Select Committee, who was fully pro the trans activist position. On checking, it wasn't her but Nicola Richards - who left the committee last month, for reasons unknown.

The legal challenge should have succeeded purely on the grounds that the consultation failed to meet the gunning principles. It may have been possible after the event to have had the whole consultation thrown out because of this but it would have been high risk.

Yes, thank you very much, Dr Nicola Williams.
Basically the proposals are a Trojan horse: Stonewall (for it is they!) want to introduce "gender identity" into UK law by the back door by banning conversion therapy for GI. As usual SW are trying to slip an unpopular measure (banning GI conversion therapy including for KIDS) through at the same time as the uncontentious ban on gay conversion therapy (which hardly happens in the UK anyway). We know their tactics now!

The term "gender critical" was coined in order to distinguish these women and their allies (1) defending women's SEX-based rights and (2) challenging the introduction into UK law of "gender identity" (a wishy-washy concept which is not defined in the GRA). I am happy to describe myself as a "gender-critical feminist" as these are the issues which concern me.

#sexnotgender

I lobbied my MP for the delay via Sex Matters' very helpful form, so a shout out to them, as well as a congrats to FPFW.

Yes. Totally agreed. Sex Matters and FPFW are working well and effectively together, on these extraordinarily important issues.

Bloody brilliant. This has reminded me to add "Donation to Fair Play for Women" to my Christmas list

Dr Nic is a force of nature

According to an email newsletter I got from Stonewall, this is the reason:

"The extension comes after the UK Government failed to provide an easy read version of the consultation, which is necessary to ensure that the consultation is accessible for all"